Disney confirms 'Frozen' makeover coming to Epcot's Norway Pavilion

[BigTxEars]

Sorry, not falling for your political tricks. If you want me to answer, I will - in the way I think is best, and not in the slanted way you wish. Trying to boil it down to "one word" is absurd - and EXACTLY the symptom of what is going on here - you want things boiled down to sound bites without context in an attempt to dismiss them. Seriously, what you are asking is ridiculous and single-minded.

1. No, they are not - they are part of a larger Nordic fantasy/folklore that is not specific to Norway but in no way factual. If we are to use your assumption that simply because something is old fantasy and that somehow makes it less fantastical, I'd point you to Grimm's Fairy Tales, which in one way or another go back nearly as deep in history (Grimm brothers were just the first to write them down/compile them), which are what most of Disney's animated classics is based upon.

2. Your focus on Anna and Elsa in particular is telling. No, as far as I know, those specific personalities/characters themselves are specifically represented - but they aren't building an Anna & Elsa ride - they are building a FROZEN ride. Frozen, which has many connections to Norway, according to everyone else but some folks on a message board like this.

Norwegian Connections in Frozen

Finding Arendelle (The real locations, including Arendal, that are the basis for the film)

Disney's Frozen inspired by Central Norway (which details the creators journey to Norway to get authentic elements)

Disney's 'Frozen' Frenzy Includes Norway Tourism - Dismiss it if you want, but it's a fact - a lot of people associate the film enough to want to spend thousands of bucks to travel there and see the sites it's based upon

And, just in the interest of not letting it get lost in an avalanche of reality, here is a dissenting opinion - an article who's "sources" are disgruntled Facebook posters, LOL - Walt Disney World Fans Express Frustration. Though even some of them acknowledge it's connections, it's just not "enough" for them.


But, a few folks all agitated on a Disney park message board know more than the rest of the world, I know...I know...LOL. I'm just the evil awful idiot moron who provides a different voice than the knee-jerk generally disgruntled folks who have found a new thing to be disgruntled about - when there are far, far worse things going on at WDW than them putting in this ride which the only projected complaints of guests will be based on how popular it will be. Them's high class problems, as my grandfather would say, LOL.

Good post. But I'm going to go out on a limb and say it won't change the mind of many who dislike this move.

Regardless the water is under the bridge on this one, the new ride is on the way regardless of rather it should be or not. I think the next major round on this matter on these forums will be after the ride opens and the reviews are posted, that should be interesting I can only imagine the verbal jabs flying back and forth then. If they do not come up with a viable way to handle the crowds it will be really interesting on here as well as in the park.

 

[AEfx]

ahem, didn't one CM that works on the norway pavilion debunked most of these points already?
specifically the "Arendal" link?

I recall someone posting that indeed it was based on many things in Norway (which most folks ignored), but he still didn't like it as a replacement.

Also, I remember how someone mockingly said that "Disney will now try to make the excuse that Arendelle = Arendal to justify their link on the norway pavilion" a few dozens of pages ago.

It's not Disney that's making that connection - nothing I linked to was provided by Disney.

If someone can really take the time to read the articles I linked to, and come back and say that it's all invented does not contain huge swaths of elements of Norway, they are lying or have no reading comprehension.

 

[celluloid]

Everything in World Showcase is scaled down and romanticized. Authentic in giving some culture to a theme park but ultimately still a theme park. We can easily doubt the hosts Mark Twain and Ben Franklin spoke the way they do and we know they have never met but go along for "the ride."
The same goes for the original Future World. EPCOT has always included a touch of science fiction and escapism in the true science of Future World. Quit beating the dead horse.

 

[Next Big Thing]

And Pixar took research trips to South America for UP. If a country from South America is added, should it have an UP ride? I know this change is coming and I can't stop it. Doesn't mean I can't vent my frustration.

Not that I would want an UP attraction in WS at all (I feel like an UP ride should be in DHS as their Peter Pan type ride), but it sure would fit better there than any of the other countries...

 

[disney4life2008]

Related but not related - I do enjoy the Frozen game on my phone

 

[danlb_2000]

Good post. But I'm going to go out on a limb and say it won't change the mind of many who dislike this move.

Regardless the water is under the bridge on this one, the new ride is on the way regardless of rather it should be or not. I think the next major round on this matter on these forums will be after the ride opens and the reviews are posted, that should be interesting I can only imagine the verbal jabs flying back and forth then. If they do not come up with a viable way to handle the crowds it will be really interesting on here as well as in the park.

You obviously haven't read any of the Avatar threads. The quality of the attraction will be debated endlessly on here between now and when it opens.

 

[BigTxEars]

You obviously haven't read any of the Avatar threads. The quality of the attraction will be debated endlessly on here between now and when it opens.

True, good point. That will all be conjecture largely, those threads get interesting as well. I do think the anger will die down some until the ride open at which point it will flare back up.

 

[Arty Cordova]

I went by Norway yesterday and I think the frozen ride is going to be great. At the end of the die, the Norway site was all based on marketing silly little trolls, not even cool Viking stuff. The new ride will be a major enhancement and bring a nice revenue lift to the park. This annual pass member approves.

 

[BigTxEars]

I went by Norway yesterday and I think the frozen ride is going to be great. At the end of the die, the Norway site was all based on marketing silly little trolls, not even cool Viking stuff. The new ride will be a major enhancement and bring a nice revenue lift to the park. This annual pass member approves.

Oh man you are going to get it from some on here now

As a fellow annual pass holder I agree BTW, love having something new to look forward too. I would prefer a huge new ride of course but this will do for now

 

[AEfx]

And Pixar took research trips to South America for UP. If a country from South America is added, should it have an UP ride? I know this change is coming and I can't stop it. Doesn't mean I can't vent my frustration.

And I have no issue with folks being unhappy about it. It's when folks are unhappy about it and tell everyone else to be unhappy about it and justify it with reasoning that is flawed instead of just owning up to the fact they are unhappy about it - emotions are OK to have, but some folks feel they must justify their emotion which almost never ends well.

As to the Up thing, here again is the folly of this discussion - if that was the ONLY thing, then yes, I could see it questioned. But there is connection upon connection and identification upon identification, that, even if we don't think it's valid, CLEARLY has taken hold in the public consciousness. But folks pick here and there which ones to systematically eliminate, and act like that somehow negates the entire obvious truth of the situation - if it's Disney's invention, or not, it doesn't matter - the public now identifies Frozen with Norway. There is no turning back on that.

So we can nitpick about dragon decorations in China, or if characters came to world showcase in 1982 or 1985 - but the reality is - this is what is happening, and if folks just don't like it - more power to them. Everyone can like or dislike whatever they want. It's the endless hyperbole over this and the willful ignoring of what WS is when you look it objectively. Yes, it's beautiful. Yes, the architecture is very, very well themed - but it's not authentic, it's a facade - literally and figuratively (*insert someone say that some single brick in some building was from the host country so that completely negates the overall facts).

 

[sedati]

Harambe is a fictional African country so they're free to put whatever they want in there as long as the property fits Harambe's Setting i.e the Lion King. Norway in Epcot is supposed to be an actual representation of the country and its culture. It isn't something Disney came up with themselves like Harambe.

That's it? Semantics? You do cross a bridge and enter a land called "Africa" correct? The story is that you are in an actual representation of that continent (not a specific country, but still meant to be reality based.) Then all Disney has to do is re-christen the pavilion back to the more generic "Scandinavia" and all's right with the world(showcase). Epcot Center purists will be thrilled as this was the original idea before the financing came in and it became simply "Norway."
Also, check out the Viking Longboat in Elsa's bedroom, perhaps she's also a Maelstrom fan.

 

[danlb_2000]

And I have no issue with folks being unhappy about it. It's when folks are unhappy about it and tell everyone else to be unhappy about it and justify it with reasoning that is flawed instead of just owning up to the fact they are unhappy about it - emotions are OK to have, but some folks feel they must justify their emotion which almost never ends well.

So you are saying people shouldn't be allowed to explain why they believe something is a bad idea? Whenever someone dislikes something it's just an emotional response not based in any sort of reality?

 

[AEfx]

Oh man you ar egging to get it form some on here now

As a fellow annual pass holder I agree BTW, love having something new to look forward too. I would prefer a huge new ride of course but this will do for now

And that's just it - I too would love a huge new ride. I liked Maelstrom. I will miss it. I like creepy rides.

But...overall, I understand - if you are WDW, and you are not being granted the budget to do that - largely due to dumping a couple of billion into bracelets - and you have an attraction which reportedly gets the lowest guest satisfaction scores in the entire resort, and a property that folks are beating down the doors to have an attraction based on, and you can use that limited budget to create a ride that far more guests are likely going to want to experience - I see why it's being done.

It certainly isn't ideal, but it isn't some great big out of nowhere slap in the face like putting a Stitch in Germany, which is what some folks are making it out to be.

 

[AEfx]

So you are saying people shouldn't be allowed to explain why they believe something is a bad idea? Whenever someone dislikes something it's just an emotional response not based in any sort of reality?

Yes, that is exactly what I said.



(In case someone can't understand sarcasm, that was it - I clearly made no such generalities and the very quote this was in reply to clearly did not state any such thing.)

 

[Next Big Thing]

So you are saying people shouldn't be allowed to explain why they believe something is a bad idea? Whenever someone dislikes something it's just an emotional response not based in any sort of reality?

No he's saying don't try and shove your opinion in the face of those opposed to your opinion.

Your emotion and connection to Maelstrom is fine, but there's no reason to go around and try and change people's opinion.

 

[danlb_2000]

No he's saying don't try and shove your opinion in the face of those opposed to your opinion.

Why not? If I firmly believe in my opinion why shouldn't I try to convince others of it? If someone feels that an opinion is being shoved in there face, there is always the ignore function.

@AEfx's and other's posts seem to be pushing their opinion that the change is ok, why is it a problem when someone pushes their opinion that it's not ok.

 

[danlb_2000]

No he's saying don't try and shove your opinion in the face of those opposed to your opinion.

Your emotion and connection to Maelstrom is fine, but there's no reason to go around and try and change people's opinion.

I have ridden Maelstrom twice in my life, I have no emotion of connection to it. I have more rational reasons for feeling that Frozen is a bad idea. And since the purpose of a discussion board is to have discussions, I see no problem with explaining why I feel this way, and I have no problem with people who explain why they think it's a good idea.

 

[Next Big Thing]

Why not? If I firmly believe in my opinion why shouldn't I try to convince others of it? If someone feels that an opinion is being shoved in there face, there is always the ignore function.

@AEfx's and other's posts seem to be pushing their opinion that the change is ok, why is it a problem when someone pushes their opinion that it's not ok.

I personally see what he's doing as pushing back, but i'm not going to get into that.

I think debates are fine, but I see no point when Maelstrom is closing for good in a matter of hours. All you are doing is living in the past by debating whether or not it belongs.

This is why I left this thread originally and am leaving this thread again now. Nothing but pointless debates happen in here.

 

[danlb_2000]

I personally see what he's doing as pushing back, but i'm not going to get into that.

I think debates are fine, but I see no point when Maelstrom is closing for good in a matter of hours. All you are doing is living in the past by debating whether or not it belongs.

This is why I left this thread originally and am leaving this thread again now. Nothing but pointless debates happen in here.

Do you really think our debate here ever had a chance of changing Disney's mind on this? If not, then debating before the fact is really no different then debating after the fact.

 

[BigTxEars]

So you are saying people shouldn't be allowed to explain why they believe something is a bad idea? Whenever someone dislikes something it's just an emotional response not based in any sort of reality?

It's the method some do it with, not the fact that they do it. Some of them drag anyone on here who disagrees with them into their rage towards Disney.

Go back into the #750 post range to see where the conversation with me on here turned ugly. ed off poster who opposed this move did not like my opinion so they started their childish attics. #763 & #770 were the points where it became clear that some on here did not want to conversant they just want their views reaffirmed. When that did not occur they just continued to try and bully their point in, look at #802, classic way some on here handle people who disagree with them. It's all right there for anyone interested to read.